In addition to the 2040 no-build scenario, three build scenarios were evaluated. The first build scenario is based on information provided by MTA which assumed doubling the frequencies of the Penn Line during peak hours for testing purpose only. This scenario was used to determine an upper limit for the potential demand for the corridor, although operating at this increased frequency would be infeasible based on current capacity restrictions. Comparing the transit headways coded in the MWCOG, BMC, and DVRPC models, the proposed schedule reduces the headway by 50% and off peak headways are unchanged. Standard practice is to assume wait time is to be half of headways. Thewait time was reduced by half between TAZ pairs served by the extension for peak periods. This build scenario assumes the rail route is connected but does not account for the speed differences between MARC and SEPTA.

The second build scenario differs by assuming transfers at Newark for both peak period and off peak period. The transfer time is added by identifying the arrival and departure times for MARC and SEPTA service. Additional boarding time was added to TAZ pairs that are served by the extensions that use the Newark station.

The third build scenario is based on the new schedule “MARC Exercise #1a – schedule with express service.xlsx” provided by WILMAPCO. The new schedule was compared with the first build scenario and additional wait time was added to the TAZ pairs crossing through the Newark station. The seven- to eight-minute transfer time at Newark in the daily last run for both northbound and southbound was not accounted for due to model limitations. The detailed headways for all scenarios can be found in Table 4.